GH6 with ProRes

ahalpert said:
it's possible that I'm being too hard on 8-bit 4:2:0.
Click to expand...

I can understand roxics viewpoint. For years we worked with DVC-Pro 25 which was a 25Mbps 411 format. Again years of production with DVCam, which was really the start of the 25Mbps 420 formats delivered good looking content. And we had awesome images coming out of HDCam in the late '90s which was a real oddball format. 8-bit DCT 3:1:1 color space with rectangular pixels with a resolution of 1440 x 1080. And all at a measly 144Mbps. A massive amount of great material has been shot on all manner of formats which today would get sneered at.

Years back this question of 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2, 8-bit vs 10-it was being asked. This following, now ageing video if you want to take the time to watch it was really quite a good look at AVCHD 420 vs Prores 422. Apart from a mistake where he states at the beginning of the video that Prores 422 was 8-bit, I think it was a pretty balanced look at how even today a now lowly considered 420 format can still stand up to deliver a decent quality production. That's the crux of the matter. A well-produced 420 8-bit production will murder a crappy 444 12-bit production.

Chris Young

 
ahalpert said:
a struggle to export to it? or a struggle to open it and play it back? I thought it could be opened but not necessarily saved to?
Click to expand...

I don't get a lot of demand for Prores output but when I do in Windows Resolve 17 I've been using Voucoder for nearly a year now. Seems to work fine. Nobody I've supplied the Prores files to seems to have any issues with them. Totally unofficial I would imagine.

Chris Young

P.S.
Voukoder gets updated quite frequently so if you do use it check for updates every now and again.

https://www.voukoder.org/

 
Last edited:
An informative review shot entirely on the GH6. It's nice that they typically do this at DPReview --to shoot the review with the camera they are reviewing,-- so, as you watch the episode, you have a 'feeling' for the type of image that the camera produces in real world situations (not just from test charts or during brief scenes that last just few seconds, like in most of camera reviews). The GH6 seems to produce a quite nice image (with the classic 'Panasonic' mojo) but , for me, it still looks like high quality 'video', something that I consider happens with all of the mirrorless cameras for that matter (including the new Canon R5c), maybe with the exception of the Fuji ones (XT3, XT4). The image that comes out of cinema cameras like the Canon C70 (or C300 III), Sony FX9 (not the FX6 which looks 'videoish' too), ARRIs, Kinefinitys, BM, REDs... is just different in character, it is genuinely more 'filmic', the richness and differentiation of colors, the handling of the highlights, the level of 'real' detail (which is not the same as sharpness), the amount of information in the shadows... I think there is probably something fundamental about being an hybrid type of sensor (photo & video) that will always makes technologically very difficult to produce very 'filmic looking' motion picture images on those photo cameras.

 
Last edited:
filmguy123 said:
Yeah, it's awesome. Now I have an S1H that feels outdated. I mean, I can only hit 4k60p in the S1H in S35 crop mode, and that at 10-bit 420. Still love it, but, bring on the S1H mk ii! GH6 will be a travel video workhorse for me.
Click to expand...

Ironically with a Speedbooster 4k 60p is a wider FOV than the S1H is with its crop mode. If one wants more than 4k 30p m43 is still just as capable in terms of DOF and FOV. One of the reasons I got the Canon R6 is its one of the only FF cameras that can actually do FF 4k 60p.
 
I was just thinking of selling my anamorphic set isco red / HCDNA and getting a Aivascope for the R5 but the GH6 might change my mind. The GH6 seems perfect as static C-Cam for events, for car mount rigs where full frame lenses are too heavy and for anamorphic handheld stills and video. At a price point of 1,840€ net I am very tempted.. (I still own the m43 lens arsenal 7-14, 12-35, 12-60 Leica and a bunch of adapted FDs including a speedbooster)
 
I'm floored by what seems to be a perfectly planned sensor for anamorphic. I would think that would get more recognition in reviews. Shooting open gate is 5760x4320 in 4x3. 8k video just so happens to be 4320 tall. 5760 x a 1.33333x anamorphic lens is exactly 7680 wide or the UHD form of 8k video. The GH6 with a minor 1.333x anamorphic lens is essentially a 8k camera when shooting open gate. Its limited to up to 30p which should be perfectly fine for a lot of productions. A cropped version could handle up to 60p so slow motion material will be a bit softer but Panasonic should really be promoting this detail as its a big deal and likely to turn a lot of heads. This is a 8k camera when shooting anamorphic. Even with a wider anamorphic lens the height is still 8k height and by definition you are shooting 8k video. Sure maybe softer than a true 8k sensor but thats always true of anamorphic anyway. Scaled down to a 4k delivery it should be very stunning. Making this just about a perfect 8k anamorphic with 4k delivery camera. Eventually it will get that open gate to external ProRes raw as well making it even better.

Despite some flaws on m43 its still a champ when it comes to anamorphic. Panasonic has taken anamorphic seriously since the GH4 and that support just keeps getting better. The natural 4x3 sensor shape is just so perfect for anamorphic. Yeah its AF is not great but no anamorphic lens has AF anyway so no loss at all if shooting anamorphic. The low light may not be as good as some FF options at extreme high ISO levels but how many anamorphic productions use just existing light? If one wants to put in the effort to shoot anamorphic there is a good chance they will light as well.
 
I'm still not a huge fan of shooting anamorphic but even cropping the open gate sensor like many Hollywood movies actually do instead of shooting anamorphic is 5760x2400 for a 2.4:1 aspect. Thats still more than 4k resolution for the width and height leaving room to reframe, track or oversample as desired.
 
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1583628-REG/sirui_sr35_m_35mm_f_1_8_anamorphic_lens.html

This lens combined with the GH6 shooting open gate essentially gives one a $3,000 8k anamorphic system with a normal focal length suitable for most productions. One could shoot all their narrative with that one lens. Could be a killer wedding option as well. 8k with a look beyond spherical lenses and still delivering a normal 16x9 aspect ratio to fill clients TVs. Thats one heck of a unique wedding camera setup. No AF needed either since these lenses have no AF. While a slightly softer 8k video compared to what a Canon R5 could do its also $900 less and includes a lens in the cost and delivers a look the R5 on its own with spherical lenses cannot do. Scaled down for 4k delivery should look stunning.

To be honest for the price of a longer telephoto lens to add to my new Canon R6 I could just get a GH6 and a much more compact telephoto lens for the same reach. Plus it would be 25MP vs 20MP of the R6 for that same reach. I could use the GH6 as my telephoto lens for photos and also use it as my cinema camera to shoot 8k anamorphic video by adding a $800 lens. Eventually the Gh6 will record to external SSD like the Pocket cameras do and we will get external ProRes raw as well which will make the 8k anamorphic even better. Sensitivity will not be stunning but I have heard up to ISO 5000 is pretty solid on the camera. Might not be as good when using ProRes raw but then its cleaner to use post NR for even better results so who cares.

From a film making perspective the Canon R5 just got some decent competition. Not to mention the GH6 will not overheat at all. Good luck getting good anamorphics for FF for a decent price as well which puts using m43 at an even bigger advantage for anamorphic right now. It can create a look just not really realistically possible on the R5 right now.
 
I wouldn’t expect too much from a 800$ lens. Also anamorphic aspect ratio 1:1,33 isn’t real anamorphic. My 2cts and ymmv
 
Clermond said:
I wouldn’t expect too much from a 800$ lens. Also anamorphic aspect ratio 1:1,33 isn’t real anamorphic. My 2cts and ymmv
Click to expand...

Yes I'm aware of that. But it just so happens to turn a 4x3 sensor into 16x9 meaning it can turn the GH6 into a 8k camera. Its an in-between solution that just happens to work perfectly for the GH6 sensor.

I think the more expensive 1.8x anamorphic are a better solution but this might be a solid solution to push the limits of the GH6.
 
Thomas Smet said:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...phic_lens.html

This lens combined with the GH6 shooting open gate essentially gives one a $3,000 8k anamorphic system with a normal focal length suitable for most productions. One could shoot all their narrative with that one lens. Could be a killer wedding option as well. 8k with a look beyond spherical lenses and still delivering a normal 16x9 aspect ratio to fill clients TVs. Thats one heck of a unique wedding camera setup. No AF needed either since these lenses have no AF. While a slightly softer 8k video compared to what a Canon R5 could do its also $900 less and includes a lens in the cost and delivers a look the R5 on its own with spherical lenses cannot do. Scaled down for 4k delivery should look stunning.
Click to expand...

does anybody need this? sounds pretty niche. or useful for infrequent projects. or one tool/look in the kit that you bring.

and I think it will be a while before real people need or want 8K, especially in the wedding space. I know there are some RED users shooting weddings for years, presumably at higher resolutions. But one of my main wedding studios is switching to 4K only this year, meaning that I now shoot for 2 studios in 4K. The other 5 are still all in HD, IIRC. And the first 4K TVs were released in 2012. If you applied the same delay between 8K TV sales (which basically began in 2018) and 8K adoption in the wedding space, then it would take another 6 years before requests came through. But because of the diminishing returns from higher resolutions, and the fact that nobody wants to see close-ups of themselves in 8K, I think the transition will take even longer or never happen at all

"no AF needed since these lenses have no AF" -- true, you no longer lose out on not having AF because the lens doesn't have it anyway. but that doesn't mean you won't wish it did...
 
ahalpert said:
does anybody need this? sounds pretty niche. or useful for infrequent projects. or one tool/look in the kit that you bring.

and I think it will be a while before real people need or want 8K, especially in the wedding space. I know there are some RED users shooting weddings for years, presumably at higher resolutions. But one of my main wedding studios is switching to 4K only this year, meaning that I now shoot for 2 studios in 4K. The other 5 are still all in HD, IIRC. And the first 4K TVs were released in 2012. If you applied the same delay between 8K TV sales (which basically began in 2018) and 8K adoption in the wedding space, then it would take another 6 years before requests came through. But because of the diminishing returns from higher resolutions, and the fact that nobody wants to see close-ups of themselves in 8K, I think the transition will take even longer or never happen at all

"no AF needed since these lenses have no AF" -- true, you no longer lose out on not having AF because the lens doesn't have it anyway. but that doesn't mean you won't wish it did...
Click to expand...

Of course it’s niche. At the same time it offers solid 4K as well. I personally don’t think we will be delivering 8k anytime soon and no client is going to demand it. Shooting 8k is more about having overhead much like why we want 14+ stops of DR or 24 bit audio. Down converting 8k to 4K just provides options.

Im frankly surprised you work fir places still shooting HD. I get not delivering in 4K but there is no reason not to shoot 4K anymore.
 
We definitely do not want 24-bit audio, ha. Don't even give them ideas.

We want 32-bit float and that would redefine the term 'game changer'.

But I doubt it will ever make it into cameras because it's just too good.
 
NorBro said:
We definitely do not want 24-bit audio, ha. Don't even give them ideas.

We want 32-bit float and that would redefine the term 'game changer'.

But I doubt it will ever make it into cameras because it's just too good.
Click to expand...

sound guys don't seem to care about 32-bit float. once again - niche. like recording explosions. with minimal oversight/mixing, I don't think we NEED more than 24-bit
 
Thomas Smet said:
Im frankly surprised you work fir places still shooting HD. I get not delivering in 4K but there is no reason not to shoot 4K anymore.
Click to expand...

every single one of my wedding studios was shooting in HD until last year. last year was the first time that one switched. they don't need to "future-proof" anything. they're delivering a couple months after the shoot and then forgetting about it. the edits mostly live on social media. the downside to shooting 4K is storage sizes, both locally and on the cloud, as well as transfer times. they store numerous copies of the footage. they use editors who live in south america, eastern europe, etc, so they want to make it easy to transfer to them.

I assume that the studios who have switched to 4K are now delivering in 4K. we generally don't crop to reframe in weddings. maybe a little bit here and there, but by and large we try to get a framing in camera. I'm not sure if I cropped a single shot in the last wedding I edited, but I can't remember

most if not all of my commercial/doc/corporate clients are shooting 4K even if they're delivering HD. but I just shot an interview last week in HD 30p on the FS7 for a British documentary company. again, I think they were hoping to minimize transfer time because they needed it right away. It was also a CU of a talking head, so it's not like they'll want to crop in on it
 
Last edited:
Maybe this will give anamorphic a shot in the arm ... but I doubt it. It seems made for crewed sets with focus pullers extraordinaire. On a 2-page-per-day shooting schedule. With the aforementioned focus pullers extraordinaire. And very high end gear.

Watch Canon respond with a 2.4 frame on R5. And the dual pixel AF.
 
ahalpert said:
sound guys don't seem to care about 32-bit float. once again - niche. like recording explosions. with minimal oversight/mixing, I don't think we NEED more than 24-bit
Click to expand...

Absolutely incorrect.

But I'll try to be understanding because it's obvious you never used it because the example you provided is foolish. Explosions? Who is filming explosions besides the 1%? [And these can be created in post.]
___

Working by yourself in so many environments and having the option of not worrying about clipping during interviews, multiple speaker panels (low and high talkers), events, sports games (and sports celebrations), etc. is one of the best inventions [and comforts] this industry has ever seen.

Almost every sound guy/gal I know in New York City has a 32-bit kit. Doesn't mean all do and doesn't mean all will use it and doesn't mean they are now better because of it, but 32-bit float is still extremely useful for them and even more for solo camera operators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top